A Real Way 'Forward'

The Washington Post's Jonathan Rauch has suggested a path towards re-election for Mr. Obama.  While it isn't everything that I would hope for, it does represent modest real progress for the country.

The three elements that Mr. Rauch suggests are:

1.  Long term fiscal retrenchment - He suggests something along the lines of Simpson-Bowles; the national commission that Mr. Obama established to look at long term fiscal reform.  Given that he created the commission and established its objectives, it would be a pity to waste all that effort.

2.  Short term economic stimulus - Given the patronage and graft evident in the 2009 stimulus as well as the wholesale transfer of American funds to European banks, I have my doubts about Mr. Obama's ability to pull off a proper stimulus.  But if it were coupled with the other elements with an emphasis on the "fiscal retrenchment" now instead of in the ubiquitous "out years", then I am sure that we could survive another round of modest stimulus.

3.  A two-year extension on the debt ceiling - As with the stimulus, I think this is something that could be worked out if enough emphasis were placed on spending reductions.

But the problem is that Mr. Rauch has properly qualified his suggested course of action.

The president’s failure, so far, to show that he understands the scope of the economy’s problems and knows how to fix them does not stem from having nothing to say: investment in education, energy, innovation and infrastructure are reasonable things. But they are also slow-acting, small-bore stuff. Such talk does not include additional economic stimulus, an element that many economists, especially Democratic-leaning ones, consider crucial to prevent a double-dip recession. Nor does it deal realistically with long-term growth in spending.

Emphasis added.

The problem is that he does not understand how the economy works.  Instead he prefers to trade upon stoking class envy and the lust for unearned wealth. 

Unless that changes, Mr. Obama is doomed to be a one term President.

The Eye In The Sky

Duality.

How does a technology geek possess concerns about the lawless use of technology?

How does a civil libertarian appreciate our ever increasing knowledge and application of technology?

It is a bit of a conundrum.

The news this past week included word that our friends at Lockheed-Martin have come up with a new spy drone that is based on the physics of the maple seed.  For the uninitiated, a maple seed has a pouch on one end.  The balance of the seed is a broad thin blade.  When the maple drops a seed, the blade naturally causes the seed to spin.  The aerodynamics of the blade helps the seed stay in the air longer and thus be able to travel further from the tree before it reaches the ground.

This new spy drone has a pod on one end where the electronics lives.  The blade is an airfoil like half of a helicopter rotor.  There is a small engine with a propeller on the end of the blade that can drive the blade so the whole thing spins.

Unlike the maple seed, this drone...the Samarai...can fly up as well as down.  It can also move forward, backwards, and side-to-side.  They think it can even fly inside windows to snoop around inside buildings.

Just think of the fun!

Which is why so many folks that care about our ever intrusive government...and limiting that intrusiveness...were posting comments about this new bit of technology.  Rich Lowry of the National Review suggests that such concerns are overblown.  He thinks that past legal limitations on the use of past technology provide a reasonable model for how future technology will be similarly limited.

I'd really like to believe that.

One the one hand, I really am fine with using any and all technological advances to their fullest in our War on Terror.

On the other hand, I really want our law enforcement officers to have rules that limit their actions and respect our individual liberty.  History suggests that such limitations are not always as effective as intended.  It does not help that the current administration seems to be stuck on the idea that Americans who profess a preference for individual liberty are a greater terrorist threat than some extremist Jihadists that have spent so much time and effort at attacking Americans; military and otherwise.

I think you can see the problem.

The fortuitous aspect to the current discussion is that I have a book idea rolling around in my head.  One of the sub-plots for this book has to do with the thorough use of surveillance technologies.

While I would like to say that this is a "win-win", I think the best I can do is a mild "tie-lose".

Goodbye Old Friend, Good Puppy

Puppy, Goof, Goofus, Furball, Furbag, Four-pawed-freak-of-nature, Hey You....

Asha.

And Your Point Is?

I love this too much not to pump it a little.

Mr. Obama apparently has been making a big deal about Mr. Romney's Swiss bank account.  However, it has been observed that the money in that account was legally obtained and properly reported to the IRS.

So the problem is supposed to be that Mr. Romney has money?  Isn't part of the problem with the lackluster economic recovery the fact that Mr. Obama stokes class/wealth envy by demonizing the wealthy?

Educating The Masses

Because not everything you see/read on the internet is true!

Venus' Backside

About the best photo I've seen. Click to embiggen.

Venus transiting old Sol

Although this one ain't half bad.

Calling All The Balls And Strikes

As some of my 3.2 regular readers know, I used to listen to Rush Limbaugh.  A lot.  But my daily schedule changed.  And my tastes changed.

I moved on.

I recently happened across a Facebook page called "Rush Babes for America".  I thought "Che cosa è questo?"

What indeed.....

You might think that such a page might feature "babes" in some small way.  This is Facebook after all, so one shouldn't expect too much, assuming that this is an area where one might have "expectations".  Perhaps I should say no more.

After all, it was one Robert Stacy McCain, no relation to the more widely known Senator, that once observed in his glorious treatise regarding the accumulation of visits to one's site that periodic paeans in appreciation of the distaff tend to generate the requisite amount of web traffic.  Were I that sort of whore, then you might have been treated to far more bikini shots.

But I'm not.  Lucky you. 

They call it "Rule #5" in the industry.

So what did I find on this Facebook page that is theoretically devoted to "babes" that are fans of the self-proclaimed Doctor of Democracy?   Were there photos of these "babes"?  Links?  Allusions?  Illusions?

Nope.  It is nothing but a gutless attempt at self promotion with nary a woman in sight.

Obama In History/Obama Inhistory

It was noted a while back that someone on Mr. Obama's staff had apparently been mucking around in the official biographies of past Presidents as presented on the official White House website.  This unnamed person added little factoids to the biographies of past Presidents; Republican and Democrat alike.

While this episode was moderately interesting in the past, it really wasn't worthy of mention here until now.

When I found this website.  Enjoy!

Boys Vs. Girls

That is just about how it works.

In Which Offense Is Taken

The inter-tubes are all abuzz over the news that some leftish entertainment network had the audacity to include an image of former President George W. Bush's likeness poised atop a pike.  I am sure that Vlad the Impaler is having a modest chuckle over this episode.

I must admit to having twin responses to this story.  One response was "oh no" expressed with modest bit of appreciation for this mischievousness involved.  The other was "oh no" with a more serious and negative emotion attached.  Is it possible to have such divergent responses simultaneously?  I did.

Observations about the lack of outrage emanating from the media over this incident when compared to the (thus far theoretic) notion of an entertainment company doing the same thing to the likeness of Barack Obama, or Bill Clinton, or John Kennedy are accurate, cogent, and appropriate.  Our leftish dominated media reserves such moments of outrage solely for those occasions when their oxen are being gored.

The discovery of this singular act of poor taste and crass partisan ship was revealed on the audio commentary portion of the DVD.  A screen shot of the frame where Mr. Bush's likeness appears does not overtly suggest that his countenance, although the resemblance is obvious once it is pointed out.

Despite reports from some theoretically professional quarters, [coughCNNcough] this was not discovered by an astute viewer, but instead was more closely examined upon hearing the aforementioned comments.  A small lesson here...folks, sometimes it is better not to tell all you know!

From the audio commentary:

“The last head on the left is George Bush,” the producers say in the audio commentary. “George Bush’s head appears in a couple beheading scenes. It’s not a choice, it’s not a political statement. It’s just, we had to use what heads we had around.”

After a modest amount of complaining, the producers offered:

“We use a lot of prosthetic body parts on the show: heads, arms, etc. We can’t afford to have these all made from scratch, especially in scenes where we need a lot of them, so we rent them in bulk. After the scene was already shot, someone pointed out that one of the heads looked like George W. Bush.”

And this is where I get offended.  Precisely how stupid do they think I am?

Given that their program has precisely nothing to do with U.S. national politics, how did they come to be in possession of Mr. Bush's likeness?  What other visages do they have in inventory?  Is their inventory of faux heads an assortment of known faces, or is it a collection of the nondescript with a Presidential profile added just to spice things up?

I'm willing to bet that the real story is that Mr. Bush's likeness was needed for some other production; for good or for ill.  When that show ended, someone saw the head and thought "I've got to save that for something special", and not in a good way.  When this program came along, they saw an opportunity to exercise a bit of codology and went for it.

Understanding that this is an entertainment oriented [and therefore more skewed politically to the left] environment, they saw no harm in letting others in on the gag.  One reasonably suspects that this modest bit of tomfoolery actually enhanced their reputation at the time.  Not so much now.

They were acting from within an environment that is known to accept that sort of behavior.  They were safe.

Was it a choice?  Hell yes.

Was it a political statement?  Hell yes.

The producers and anyone else responsible need to man-up and accept responsibility for their actions that further coarsen our political discourse.  Of course, making a couple of heads roll would probably help as well.

Kum Phuc

Do you know the story behind this photo?

Nick Ut / The Associated Press

If you think that this image has something to do with war-mongering Americans dropping napalm on innocent civilians, then perhaps it is time to reassess.

It Didn't Work Then

Periodically, I have moments where I enjoy my online reading preferences.  One of those was a couple of days ago when Mr. Obama's campaign began pushing the idea that Mr. Romney favored fewer firemen, teachers, etc.

The Blogfather had the perfect quick take on the subject.

As my father-in-law once said, when they talk about taxes it’s always for teachers, firemen, and police — but when they spend your taxes, it always seems to go to some guy in a leather chair downtown you never heard of.

As Reason noted, a lot of the stimulus money was advertised as going to help local government jobs like teachers, cops, and firemen, but on those few occasions when the money actually supported those jobs, those people got laid off anyway after the gravy train ran empty.  Not exactly the sort of jobs program that was advertised up front.

From Mr. Romney's campaign:

“President Obama fundamentally believes in raising taxes to grow government. He believes that we must hire more government workers to fix the economy. Every day, we learn why President Obama has not been the leader to take us out of this economic crisis. President Obama wants to stimulate government, Mitt Romney wants to stimulate the real world economy.” 

It's good to understand the talking points before they come out so I can just bypass the conversation altogether later on.

Go South Young Man

In the "news you can use" category comes an assessment of energy consumption based on various regions of the United States.  Do you love Mother Earth?  Then perhaps you ought to be moving south!

Perhaps the blue model politicians whose tax and spend policies are driving businesses and residents out of their states are smarter than they look. They could be green activists, steadily working to save the earth by driving people out of the northeast. We look forward to green activists introducing legislation in Congress to levy new taxes on those whose choice to live in cold states imposes costs on the more virtuous and eco-friendly inhabitants of Texas and South Carolina.

Here She Comes

Apparently, Michigan is in the prime viewing window for tonight's unique solar event; Venus transiting the sun.  I'm not sure how one goes about viewing such a thing without all sort so of high priced fanglery.  But it sure seems like something to watch if one safely can.

You Know The Prosecution Is In Trouble

When you find something like this on a website like TalkLeft.

Zimmerman should prevail on classic self-defense at trial regardless of stand your ground. Raising stand your ground before trial gives him the possibility of a quicker win, and the opportunity to preview the state's strategy before it gets to a jury.

Lots more at the link.  A whole lot more.  But the general take-away is that based on the available evidence, Mr. Zimmerman was acting reasonably and in self-defense.

As I've said before, there is a whole lot more that I need to know before drawing a conclusion.  And since I'm not in the jury pool, it isn't likely that I'll ever know enough to satisfy myself, much less others.

But the more I learn, the more the conclusion of justifiable self-defense (regardless of Stand Your Ground) seems reasonable.

A Little Foolish Consistency

Given the amount of flack that I toss towards the NY Times, WaPo, NPR, and others, I would be remiss in not also pointing out the recent incident of bias by Fox News (as opposed to one of their opinion shows).  So in case you were wondering, the Fox News staff does apparently lean to the right.  That sort of bias has no business being associated with the presentation of news/facts.

Also for the record, that makes the score:

News organizations that lean to the right - 2
News organizations that lean to the left - hundreds if not thousands

NEWSFLASH: Stopped Clock Accurate Twice Per Day

For all the ball-busting that I give the New York Times' Paul Krugman, I feel obligated to highlight those rare moments when he is right.  As the recent US$2,000,000,000 loss by the bankers of JPMorgan suggests, there really are good reasons for our nation to have banking regulations.

Mr. Krugman is correct; regulating banks is generally a good idea.

That should not be taken to mean that I think that all of his ideas on banking regulations are good.  Some are.  Some aren't.

Also, the article belies his real intent; to criticize Mitt Romney.  The fact is that the recent US$2B loss can came after the enactment of banking reforms by the Democrats and theoretically enforced by Mr. Obama's team.  Those reforms and their enforcement failed in this case. 

Perhaps there is more to this issue than whether or not a politician has a "D" or an "R" behind their name.  Perhaps the kind of regulation that is enacted and enforced is more important that just having any old regulation on the books.

The Wise Dr. Laura

I totally ripped this off from a friend on Facebook.  But he ripped it off from someone else!

Read this recently and quite like it (it has been around the internet for a few years):

"Laura Schlesinger is a US radio personality, who dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio show. She recently said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination, according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstances. The following response is an open letter to Dr. Laura which was posted on the Internet.

Let's Ignore Some More Inconvenient Facts

Social Security edition.  Using personal accounts for a national retirement system really does work.  The charts at the link are quite telling.

And yes, I understand that there is a modest amount of apples and oranges going on with the units.

Greatest Hits?

The web is chock full of stuff that will horrify and captivate you all at the same time.  Things like....train collisions!